lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Tue, 17 Jan 2017 11:57:33 -0500 (EST)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     john.fastabend@...il.com
Cc:     jasowang@...hat.com, mst@...hat.com, john.r.fastabend@...el.com,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, alexei.starovoitov@...il.com,
        daniel@...earbox.net
Subject: Re: [net PATCH v4 2/6] virtio_net: wrap rtnl_lock in test for
 calling with lock already held

From: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2017 15:59:47 -0800

> @@ -2358,7 +2371,10 @@ static void remove_vq_common(struct virtnet_info *vi)
>  	/* Free unused buffers in both send and recv, if any. */
>  	free_unused_bufs(vi);
>  
> -	free_receive_bufs(vi);
> +	if (rtnl_is_locked())
> +		_free_receive_bufs(vi);
> +	else
> +		free_receive_bufs(vi);
>  
>  	free_receive_page_frags(vi);
>  

This doesn't work.  rtnl_is_locked() doesn't tell if _you_ own the mutex, it
just says that someone does.

So if we now execute this code without taking the RTNL lock just because some
other thread of control holds it, we introduce a race.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ